(Corrects name of FBI agent in 12th paragraph of story
published on Aug. 15.)

Aug. 15 (Bloomberg) -- Scott Allen, a former Mercer LLC
investment adviser, says he shouldn’t be sent to prison for
insider-trading because he’s assisted the U.S. on several
investigations since pleading guilty to the scheme in March.

Allen, of Atlanta, admitted in federal court in New York in
March to supplying nonpublic information to John Bennett, an
independent film producer and a longtime friend. He now says he
deserves a term of home confinement, community service,
probation or all three for aiding the government in
investigations in New York and in Atlanta.

Bennett, of Norwalk, Connecticut, pleaded guilty in
November to participating in the scheme in which he earned $2.6
million on tips he received illegal trades using information
from a friend about the April 2008 acquisition of Millennium
Pharmaceuticals Inc. by Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. and about the
September 2009 purchase of Sepracor Inc. by Dainippon Sumitomo
Pharma Co.

“There is no question that Mr. Allen violated the law and
that he knew his conduct was wrong when he engaged in it,” his
lawyer Brian McEvoy wrote in a memo to U.S. District Court Judge
Deborah Batts in New York, who is presiding over the case.

“Since pleading guilty, Mr. Allen has cooperated
extensively with and has provided substantial assistance to the
government in both this case and in another ongoing federal
criminal case.”

Sentencing Range

While Allen faces a sentencing guideline range of between
46 to 57 months for his role in the scheme, McEvoy cited Allen’s
cooperation, the low risk of recidivism and lesser prison terms
imposed upon other insider-trading defendants as reasons his
client shouldn’t be sent to prison. Federal sentencing
guidelines are recommendations and not binding upon the court.

McEvoy also said in court papers filed today that his
client provided the government with information that Lawrence
Robbins, an independent film producer, was involved in the
insider-trading scheme with Bennett and alleges that Robbins and
Bennett “conspired to obstruct justice by agreeing that Bennett
would lie to the government to conceal Robbins’s participation
in the conspiracy,” McEvoy said in court papers.

As a result of Allen’s assistance, the government won’t
seek a reduced sentence for Bennett for his assistance and would
seek an enhanced term because of this alleged obstruction of
justice, McEvoy alleged in court papers.

McEvoy didn’t return a call seeking comment about the case.
Henry Mazurek, a lawyer for Bennett, and Gerald Shargel, a
lawyer for Robbins, both declined to comment on McEvoy’s
assertions about their clients.

FBI Agents

Allen has also assisted prosecutors and agents with the
Federal Bureau of Investigation in Atlanta with another separate
case, McEvoy said, pertaining to a “large-scale scheme to
embezzle company funds” allegedly by an executive of an
Atlanta-based company where Allen has worked since January,
McEvoy said.

Allen provided the FBI with documents as well as a company
laptop and attempted to make consensually-recorded telephone
calls with the executive, McEvoy said.

Stephen Emmett, an agent with the FBI in Atlanta, said he
didn’t have an immediate comment on McEvoy’s assertions. A
spokesman for Atlanta U.S. Attorney Sally Quillian Yates didn’t
immediately return a voicemail message left at the office
seeking comment about Allen’s claims.

Manhattan Prosecutors

Manhattan prosecutors wrote to Judge Batts in July saying
they weren’t until recently aware that Allen had been providing
assistance to the FBI and federal prosecutors in Atlanta in what
they described as a “fully overt investigation in Georgia.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Levy in New York said in
the July 17 memo to the court that the target of the Atlanta
investigation was ‘‘fully aware’’ of the government’s
investigation in Georgia.

Levy also said ‘‘the scope of the defendant’s assistance to
the FBI in that matter ‘‘is likely to be a point of dispute at
sentencing,’’ and added that Atlanta prosecutors have told his
office ‘‘the defendant mas merely provided assistance of the
type and character that one would ordinarily expect from an
executive at a company that has been the victim of a crime.’’

‘‘Put simply, the defendant may not declare himself to be a
cooperator and insist that he needs more time to complete his
cooperation, all over the objection of the law enforcement
agencies he claims to be cooperating,’’ Levy wrote.

The case is U.S. v. Bennett, 11-cr-927, U.S. District
Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).